Old Earth Creationism otherwise know as O.E.C exists because various Christian scholars have decided to put their faith in science as a greater authority than the bible when it comes to origins. For them to believe anything the bible says about creation they must get permission from their favorite Ph.D. So far the science dept that dates rocks with carbon 14 and radiometric dating win the day.
I personally think that the only reason, and I mean the major reason we have O.E.C. is because the pride of education in a secular world demand some appreciation for the humanistic thinking that develops the un-biblical origins. In short, their secular peers and teachers need to feel included; now, if they abandon their secular peers they have no “peers” to appreciate their writings and works; they have no peer-review and thereby kill their writings and works by a peer-ostracizing of their writings.
To me its a form of denial, a form of compromise, where the biblical authority for origins is denied and then relegated to poetry and linguistics. Of course there is really no good proof for that, but the lie/deception that Gen 1 and 2 are poetry is out there and wrapped up in the garments of scientific proof and legitimate theorizing.
But seriously, which way can our Christian scholars go if they want the approval of secular scholars? They must go in the direction of Evolution and Old earth theorizing.
Of course none of what I’ve said is provable and Ill I’ve done is make assertions. But I ask you, just what turns a man away from the historical narrative of Gen 1-3 and begin to claim its not historical narrative but a vague poetic discourse describing poetically the events of creation.
This is the real question I have for those who claim its poetry; just how do you translate the poetry back into physical creation, what hermeneutic do you use and where are the interpretations of Genesis that take the days of Genesis and show within the rest of scripture how the bible translates the poetry for us. The bible interprets the bible, I’ve not seen the interpretation of the poetry within the bible to clarify the poetic verses and bring them into human reality.
In my opinion the poetry issue is a complete fabrication and secondly let those who claim it is poetry show us how that poetry is interpreted through the rest of scripture. Show us the metamorphosis of metaphor becoming physical reality.
The Historical Grammatical hermeneutic is rejected. Good bible scholars use the historico/grammatical hermeneutic to interpret bible passages from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22. But now, the case is changing. Various ones are no longer using one hermeneutic for scriptural exegesis, Now a modern science/linguistic approach is being used. The obvious question then needs to be asked; who’s science? The Evolutionist?, The Creationist? The skeptic or Atheist? From which of these people are we asking to supply the ‘science’ in which to backfill Genesis so we can understand the creation days? The morphing of exegesis to eisogesis has many Christians confused. Instead of the scriptures declaring from a narrative the events of God’s creative works, the linguist has arrived to call it poetry and the scientist has arrived to supply the new-narrative, one that conforms to current anti-biblical evolutionary models.
So far, what Ive seen from O.E.C. Is their dependence upon science to interpret Genesis for us, they don’t use the bible to interpret the biblical account in poetic form in this case. So, the bible remains silent while Mr. Evolutionist and Old Earth theorist is asked to speak from the pulpit. This raises a serious question; for what purpose did it serve God to leave Genesis un-interpretable for 6000 years until the necessary science was developed to understand it properly? Why did God wait, and then after all that waiting, dismiss the power of the Holy Spirit to interpret scripture and reveal its truth, it seems as though God circumvented the Holy Spirit and chose to use 21’st century science to ‘tell us what Genesis really means’. Unless, God said, “wait, instead of assuming the Holy Spirit is directing you to believe that account is a biblical narrative of what I’ve done, I have a group of secular/humanist scientists that will offer you a better interpretation”. But since the average Christian doesn’t trust the secular humanist scientist, the Christian scholar who has agreed with the scientist is ready to step up and declare his findings and use a Christian mouth to spout humanist conclusions.